News around Twitter today is the first episode of GoT S6 aired accidentally last night, for some viewers at least, and now there are spoilers posted on Reddit. I’ve seen the supposed spoilers. There’s a brief, poorly written synopsis (like, it refers to Theon as Rick) that’s mostly composed of stuff we know from preview clips, interviews, and entirely inevitable follow-ups to the Season 5 cliffhangers. No mention of the Boltons. No mention of anything happening in Meereen. The new information is logistically questionable at best.
Dave at We Hunted the Mammoth shows us this adorable idea from some guy at Reddit who thinks women will soon resort to offering threesomes to get men’s attention. This is really…special.
Women used to maintain a pussy cartel. To get any pussy you had to get married. Men want pussy so they got married. The cartel broke down a bit and women started giving access to pussy after engagement. Then the effort was lowered some more and the couple only had to be “going steady”. Next was “in a committed relationship” and eventually the “3 date rule”. Today you just swipe right on a smartphone.
Women currently sell into a hyper-competitive sex market where once they were buyers with a huge upper hand. The market is flooded and prices have dropped to $0.00. Gone are the days where they could demand any sort of commitment in exchange for access. Women still want men so they provide extra services to the men to compete for attention. Naked pics are extra services they use to keep up with the many women competing for the man they want. Either they send the pics or the guy moves on to the women who will.
I think the next major innovation will be women grouping together to offer threesomes to men in exchange for attention. Once naked pics become normalized they will have to do something. This is the next logical step.
Has it ever occurred to this cupcake that maybe, just maybe, the reason why “the price of pussy dropped” is that women were actually not so interested in long-term heterosexual monogamy? Like, maybe it was the other way around all that time? Maybe women appeared to be so interested in marriage because we kind of had to have husbands in order to get laid and not have to constantly lie about it? As soon as reliable birth control and increasingly permissive social attitudes made it okay for a girl to get some action without commitment, women became the ones who were less interested in marriage.
This kid (along with a whole lot of other Red Pill types) is somehow convinced that women are “giving away” sex because we want something else that men have to offer that they don’t currently give away for free. Does he think we want more of men’s attention? Seriously? Most of us would actually prefer to get less of that. These same guys act like women are degrading themselves by pursuing and enjoying casual sex, while said guys also make a part-time job of trying to manipulate us into giving them more access to our pussies, but, honestly, the sad truth of the matter is that women aren’t using sex as currency. We’re really not. If you can’t imagine why a woman would want to fuck you unless she’s trying to get something else, I guess that means you’re lousy in bed. Try being less lousy in bed.
If a woman’s acting like she really just wants a quick roll in the hay with some cute guy on Tinder, it’s probably because she really just wants a quick roll in the hay. He has nothing to offer her except a decent-looking bod with a healthy cock, and even that much, she might not want for more than one night.
As for threesomes…have you ever considered that if you happen to be in bed with two women at the same time, they’ll be there for each other just as much as for you? And that’s where you should be trying to be less lousy in bed. If you’re lucky enough to be in bed with two ladies at the same time, you don’t want them to ignore you.
There’s this shit on Captain Awkward:
I have a 40-year-old friend who’s very open about his frustrations with internet dating in our geeky friend circle, and recently he went on a date with a 32-year-old woman who, during their date, said that she is looking to have a couple of kids in the future. She didn’t want them straight away, but she’s looking for a relationship that would ideally end up there.
One of the cool things about online dating is that you can state in your profile that you definitely do or do not want children, and you can see how other users answer the same question. If this woman didn’t put that info in her profile, then he’s fortunate she put it out in the open on their first date.
He was appalled by this, and says he feels a) like he was being assessed for fatherhood, and b) that it was unfair that because he doesn’t want to have kids ever, (and I’m sure for other reasons,) she wouldn’t have another date with him – he thinks they’re compatible in other areas, so could have a lot of fun.
Yeah. Um. “Compatible in other areas” doesn’t really add up when one of you wants children and the other one doesn’t.
Most of our friend-group seem to be commiserating with him, but I think he’s out of order. He’s saying that there’s time for her to have a fling with him,
NOPE NOPE NOPE.
It keeps getting better, folks.
I seem to be in an extreme minority – as a gay woman who’s 40, apparently I don’t understand these things. […] But he’s being given sympathetic suggestions like he should have said he wasn’t sure about kids, and string her along for a bit, or do that AND try to persuade her she doesn’t want kids after all, which is despicable to me, or that this woman was some kind of crazy person who was only after his sperm and he had a lucky escape.
HOLY FUCK ALL THE NOPE I CAN’T EVEN.
Do you have any suggestions, or resources, to help geeky guys understand that for some (not all) women in their ‘30s, dating can be more serious than for the 40-year-old guys? I’m obviously not getting through – and given he only wants to date women in their early 30s (if a woman’s still single over 40, she’s got too much baggage, or something something? I KNOW! Why AM I friends with him?) this is unlikely to be the only time this will happen.
See what this dude’s doing here? See what his friends are encouraging him to do?
Guys, don’t do that.
Compared to a man of any age who definitely does not want children, ever, for a woman over 30, who definitely does want children, all other emotional factors being equal, dating is inherently a more serious endeavor. Why is this?
Do I really have to explain why? You know our fertility has a hard limit, right? You know there comes a time at which we can no longer conceive, at all, yes? And well before then, there comes a less certain time at which getting pregnant becomes very difficult and carrying to term gets especially dangerous? And you may have noticed there’s a lot of cultural/medical pressure on women to get our baby-having done before a certain age? Because if you haven’t noticed that pressure, trust me: it’s there. All women who want or might want kids, and have made it past 30 without having any, have noticed that pressure. Advanced maternal age becomes an issue starting at 35. If we finally start trying to conceive at 40, it’ll be really difficult-to-impossible, and that difficulty is all our fault for waiting too long. That’s the message behind the bulk of media attention to the prevalence of infertility: it’s OUR fault if we wait too long.
With that in mind, guys, lying your way into a “fling” with a 30something woman who wants to make babies is a really shitty thing to do.
You do not lie about what you want and string her along. You do not try to persuade her she doesn’t want kids after all. You definitely do not complain about sperm-jacking (which is hardly even a real thing), you do not entertain any suggestions that she might be trying to sperm-jack, if you’re trying to get her to ignore or postpone her plans for motherhood. What the woman is doing in this case is basically the very opposite of sperm-jacking, to the extent that it happens at all.
Think about this: if you’re a dude who
thinks sperm-jacking is a thing that might happen to you doesn’t want to be a father, and you’re afraid some woman might disregard your choice in the matter, then…you want to keep your pants firmly on around any woman with a stated interest in procreation. Don’t complain that she won’t go for a second date.
I am telling you all this from the perspective of having been that 30something woman who wants babies and is trying to find a family-making partner. I’ve since changed my mind, and realized that I actually like my selfish, hedonistic existence and don’t want to fuck it up with any defenseless mini-humans, but still, I’ve been in that position of trying to find a partner of the “spouse and co-parent” level, and from that mentality, dating is very serious business. My last boyfriend might have eventually made a good co-parent—who knows, he might be on his way to becoming someone else’s co-parent now!—but our relationship simply wasn’t life-partnership material. I won’t go into detail about how I ultimately decided to break it off, but I will tell you this much: when I finally reached the point where I realized that our relationship just wasn’t serious, and he wasn’t interested in getting serious, then I found that I didn’t want him in my life even as a friend. I had just turned 33, he knew I wanted children (I did, at the time, and his dating profile said he wanted kids too), and he was happy to keep taking up my time indefinitely for a relationship that was going nowhere. Once I put that together, I didn’t feel very friendly to him, and in the months that have passed, my feelings toward my ex haven’t improved. (I didn’t quite see the heights of his disrespect for me until after I broke it off, but that’s another issue.)
It’s possible for two people who both want children to date for a while and still find that it’s not working out, and that’s fine. If they’re really making it work, it’s not necessarily going to reach the kid-having stage as quickly as either of them may have wanted, and that’s okay. The fact that most relationships don’t get that far, and those that do, generally need some time to get there, is why it is really, really unacceptable to say “she has time for a fling with me” when she’s 32 and knows she wants children. No. She has time to let a relationship develop. If she’s willing to say, in as many words during the first date, that she would like to have a couple of kids, then she does not have time for a fling.
I just found this little tale of “Guess the ethnicity!” on Microaggressions:
While in a hotel restroom at a teacher conference, a middle aged lady came up to me and said “HI” in Mandarin, Japanese, and Korean, then asked, “Did I get any of those right? Are you one of those?”
When I responded that there are many other Asian countries out there with different languages, she proceeded to gush that “It’s so nice to see one of you people not working in a nail salon and speak good English.” I told her I spoke English well, and it’s a damn shame the future generation has to learn from people like her.
Teacher-lady knows how to say “Hi” in three different Asian languages, but doesn’t know well enough not to be an asshole to a random stranger in the ladies’ room.
Look, folks, just…don’t do that. You don’t need to guess a total stranger’s ethnicity. You don’t need to be clever whenever you see a person who might be from somewhere else. Heck, how do you know I’m not from somewhere else? If you haven’t heard me speak yet, how do you know I’m not German or Swedish? Some people of Asian ethnicity are native-born U.S. citizens, and of those, many don’t even speak any languages outside of English. But it’s only people of color who are assumed, sight unseen, to be newcomers to this country, and who are treated like rare exotic animals for having a solid command of the English language. No one (in this country) comes up to someone who looks like me and says “Hi” in three different Northern European languages, followed by the question of “Are you one of those?” White people can rest assured that our place in American society won’t be challenged.
I see there’s at least one reblogger on Tumblr who calls the original poster a “bitch” and insists that the teacher is “just trying to be friendly.”
How does anyone get the idea in her head that the way to be “friendly” to a total stranger whose path she crosses in the restroom is to spray a bunch of foreign languages at her and then demand to know if she’s “one of those”? How does anyone think this is welcome behavior? Based on her comments about “you people” and “working in a nail salon,” I assume teacher-lady isn’t well-acquainted with any Asian people, but if this is her idea of friendliness, she’s not going to make many new friends outside of her racial group.
Intent is not magic, and even if teacher-lady thought she was “just” being “friendly” to the random Asian woman in the restroom, that doesn’t mean her approach was acceptable. It doesn’t mean the original poster on Microaggressions is obligated to act like this doesn’t bother her. The message behind this type of communication is to tell the possibly-foreign person: “You are a stranger in this land. You don’t belong here. Don’t forget.” I’ve been on that side of the foreign/native line myself. During my Peace Corps assignment, the games of “Guess the Ethnicity!” and “HOLY SHIT I SEE A FOREIGNER” dominated my life basically every time I left the house. I know what it’s like to be treated as the “exotic” one, and let me tell you: it sucks so incredibly hard. It is obnoxious and exhausting as fuck. I, at least, had the advantage of actually being a foreigner, and knowing I was only there for 27 months before I would go home and be treated like a normal human again. This kind of attention in Western countries is regularly directed at people who’ve lived here all their lives, or close enough to it, and have no plans of moving anywhere else. The OP is not a “bitch” for trying to enforce her boundaries. She does not need to “take the stick out of her ass.” She’s not in the wrong.
If you must be friendly to a total stranger in the ladies’ room (and I don’t see what’s so difficult about peeing, washing your hands and getting out of the way), why not just say: “Hi. Are you here with the conference? Where/what do you teach? Oh, what a cute purse!”?
No matter how reprehensible Yoffe’s latest fit of faux-feminist drunk-shaming may be, I’m sure it’s nowhere near as repulsive as Julie Burchill and Helen Lewis complaining about how the intersectional feminists are so MEEN to them. I would rather pull my toenails off with pliers than give even one more pageview to anything written by Burchill, the vicious transphobic piece of work. I gotta practice self-care sometimes, folks.
Today, I’m going with the lesser of two evils.
What do you do when your state’s history includes being the place where Andrew Jackson sent thousands of Cherokee to get them out of the way? And if, among those thousands of people, some thousands died of exposure en route? If you’re Tulsa, OK, you look at that history and think it could help you look good for the IOC:
The Games require an estimated work force of as many as 200,000, which would mean enlisting one of every two men, women and children within the city limits.
International Olympic officials require a host city to have a minimum of 45,000 hotel rooms. Tulsa has about 15,000. And the estimated price tag, which will almost certainly top $5 billion, is equivalent to more than half the state budget.
But Tulsa, its boosters argue, offers something that big-ticket American rivals like Los Angeles, Boston and Dallas can only dream of — the vast frontier of America.
This part of the country produced Woody Guthrie and Jim Thorpe. Neon signs still glow along Route 66. J. Paul Getty made his first million in Tulsa nearly a century ago, and the city’s Art Deco buildings have survived booms, busts and tornadoes. “The larger cities aren’t truly representative of what the real America is,” said Jennifer Jones of the Tulsa 2024 bid committee. “The real America is the midsize cities, and we want people to see America.”
Jennifer Jones, did you just use the phrase “real America” without irony?
Downtown Tulsa now has bistros in the carcasses of forgotten warehouses, and it has BOK Center, a gleaming arena that opened in 2008, further fueling the city’s national and international ambitions.
In a nod to the state’s American Indian history, the Olympic torch would be led along the solemn Trail of Tears, not far from where field hockey would be played in Tahlequah.
I encourage you to follow the link, look at the NPS page, and ask yourself: Does it seem like a good idea to drive a gigantic international sporting event through this place?
For more context, Travis Waldron at Think Progress points out:
A little history for Tulsa’s organizers: the Trail of Tears is the result of one of the most pernicious laws in American history — the Indian Removal Act of 1830 — and it is a marker of policies that nearly eradicated an entire indigenous population of people. The death toll on the trail ranges from the government’s record of 400 to others that estimate more than 4,000 died on the march. It doesn’t merit a “nod” from Olympic organizers, especially not when mega sporting events like the Olympics have a tendency to displace poor and indigenous populations to make room for facilities or to shield them from media and tourist attention. What it merits is education and awareness about the fact that large segments of the Native population are still struggling with the after-effects of government policies slanted against them, even more than a century and a half after they walked that trail.
The Olympics are…really not intended as a vehicle for spreading awareness of genocide and its role in a country’s history. It’s true that America wouldn’t exist as we know it without my ancestors having driven a wrecking ball through all the Native cultures, but the IOC has no intention of making that message a part of the 2024 games. That would be kind of a buzzkill; it’s so much easier to have a good Olympiad when you shove the poor and indigenous folks out of the way and act like they were never there in the first place.
In a way, pulling this plan off WOULD be a way for Tulsa to show the face of Real America to the world…but not in a way they should be proud of. As a matter of presenting ourselves to the rest of the world, it would probably be best to show them one of the big cities with sufficient infrastructure already in place.
The administrators at Sir John A. Macdonald junior high school are fucking idiots who are effectively supporting bullies. It’s one thing to say you’re not going to ENCOURAGE kids to jump into life-threatening situations. That’s fine. But when a kid DOES intervene and possibly saves another kid from getting KILLED, you don’t fucking PUNISH him for playing the hero!
By all means, keep telling the bullies that their well-meaning classmates are not allowed to get in their way. Keep on teaching kids to be passive in the face of aggression.
Leah O’Donnell, you’re a great parent. Briar MacLean, you’re a good kid and you absolutely did the right thing. We need more families like you. Don’t let those bastards grind you down.
I am very sorry to hear about this case of sexual assault in Toronto:
Over the weekend a young man came forward to the police to file a report of a sexual assault that occurred early on March 31. The 19 year old told police that he had been out and upon leaving a club in Toronto’s Entertainment District he was offered a ride from four women. Instead of dropping him off, the four women took him to a parking lot and each sexually assaulted him. The police are looking for four white women between 30 and 36 around 5’4″ and between 190 and 200lbs who were out in a Honda SUV on the night of March 30.
And I am utterly unsurprised to see that social media is chock-full of people behaving like utter shitbags to this poor kid.
It’s not often that we hear about a case of a guy being raped by a woman (or several women), and with attitudes like these, is it any wonder that male rape victims are generally not interested in reporting their assaults? A male victim of female assailants can expect to be told that there’s no such thing as female-on-male rape (because men are always open to sex, donchaknow), that he’s probably gay and therefore should be ashamed (because it would be okay for those women to force themselves on a straight guy?), that the important thing is not that he didn’t consent but that the women were fat (because it would be impossible for him not to consent if the women were skinny?), that he’s reporting the rape to cover up that he cheated on his partner (because women can never be aggressors and men can never be victims), and that he should be embarrassed about this happening to him and should not bother anyone with his complaints.
In case you’re confused about the mechanics of female-on-male rape: it is possible for a guy to get an erection and ejaculate in response to non-consensual stimulation. It happens all the time. That he got it up doesn’t mean he wanted it.
You may have noticed lately that this blog is becoming more about writing and less about discussing socio-political issues. Part of that is quite prosaic: I write books, so I’m trying to be a part of the writing community and perhaps just a little trying to promote my books. Part of it is that discussing the issues is so fraught with derailment, hostility, silencing tactics and other douchebaggery.
If you have an even passing familiarity with FreeThoughtBlogs, you’ve probably heard that Thunderf00t has revealed himself as—how can I put this politely?—a net negative to the atheist community. PZ Myers gives us a handy summary and link farm post about the shit that TF has forced FTB to handle. I tend to agree with Ed Brayton that—again, putting this politely—TF should not be a respected figure in the atheist/freethought community anymore. He is a disruptive figure, and not in a creative way, just a destructive, energy-squandering way. I find Natalie Reed’s post on the destruction and energy-squandering the most relevant, however. If you’re ambivalent or apathetic about what Thunderf00t did to FTB, I urge you to read her post, and if you think that his conduct towards her is not that big a deal, please do not ever darken my virtual doorstep again. I am in no mood to engage with your callousness.
As if that’s not enough, she has to deal with derailing comments even on a post filled with that much vulnerability and exhaustion from people who think that their pet issues and reputations are so much more important than the dangers that she’s up against. This is the sort of environment that makes me want to say, “You know what? Fuck it. Nothing but fiction excerpts and grammar advice from now on.”
Which is not to say that I’m vowing never to write about real-world issues again. The real-world-issues blogging will still happen, not the least because the issues tend to come up in my fiction. Charlinder’s Walk engaged with ALL the socio-political issues. This sounds like hyperbole, but I’m only exaggerating a little. Religion/skepticism, science, education, gender/sexuality, environment, poverty, family, technology, caste, visceral racism, culture…ALL THE ISSUES. My future novels will be a bit more…contained, in terms of handling social issues. Fait Accompli mostly has to do with women’s bodily autonomy, focused on reproductive freedom and lesbian rights. Book 4 (tentatively titled Suicide is for Mortals) is perhaps more philosophical, but it deals with things like addiction, poverty, human trafficking and social isolation. I’m also planning a YA novel focused on bullying. Stuff will continue to appear on this blog. But at the moment, I’m seeing shit happen in the freethought community that destroys my interest in blogging about anything outside of indie writing.
This is me, choosing my battles.
I see what you did there, NYT. Joel Stein offered you a chance to troll for page-hits from angry YA fans, and you were only too happy to have their wrath in the comment box. What does Mr. Stein have to say?
I have no idea what “The Hunger Games” is like. Maybe there are complicated shades of good and evil in each character. Maybe there are Pynchonesque turns of phrase. Maybe it delves into issues of identity, self-justification and anomie that would make David Foster Wallace proud. I don’t know because it’s a book for kids. I’ll read “The Hunger Games” when I finish the previous 3,000 years of fiction written for adults.
Oh, for fuck’s sake.
There is no coherent position here. There is no positive defense of the pleasures of reading fiction geared to adult sensibilities. There is not even an honest distinction between children’s books and YA fiction. There’s a reason why they call it “Young Adult,” Joel. It’s closer to books for adults than books for little kids. No, Joel Stein does not tell us WHY adults should read adult books, he just looks at Harry Potter, Twilight and The Hunger Games (as if they’re interchangeable) and says, “Ew.” He made this non-argument, and the New York Times gave him a platform. Great going, NYT. This is exactly the kind of example we need to have set by the elite mainstream media.
(I’ll pause here for a moment to vacuum the sarcasm out of my keyboard.)
As a writer of grown-up fiction, the last thing I need is someone like Joel Stein on my side. This kind of looking-down-nose sneering isn’t going to make adult enthusiasts of YA fiction any less invested in their love of books geared to teens. It’s not going to make readers any more interested in books for adults. It’s certainly not going to make grown-up novels any more attractive to people who currently don’t read books for pleasure. If he wants to make YA enthusiasts even more uninterested in adult fiction, he’s doing a bang-up job. If the goal here is to make adult lit fic seem even more the bastion of unthinking snobs, then mission accomplished, but as someone who has written, continues to write and is trying to sell adult fiction, I would like to buy Joel Stein a ladder so he can get over himself.
If you’re not interested in reading The Hunger Games, then…don’t read The Hunger Games. When you compare it to Horton Hatches the Egg, however, you look like someone who could have taken a few more Literature credits in college.